Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Our Aryan Heritage: Learn about your real spiritual heritage

page: 3
112
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 26 2009 @ 04:19 PM
link   
He he, it seems that Gandhi (Dharmapal) agrees with me:




He shows the determination of British civil servants in colonizing India as per set patterns, often referred by Gandhi as divide and rule rationale.


en.wikipedia.org...




posted on Apr, 26 2009 @ 04:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Indigo_Child
 


Thank you, a wonderful read, and a great thread!

Next I will read the link in your signature titled: "
The Aryan Ancient Advanced civilization: Read"

Although I still don't know what to make of all this, but I like to think that I'm open minded, and I definitely will be researching this subject a bit more.

Mantra music was great, cosmic, thanks again.



posted on Apr, 26 2009 @ 04:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Indigo_Child
 


Apparently, you hate Christians along with other Abrahamic-religious groups, and you promote the worship of false-idols (ie: baal-god; "sun-god" & "brahman"). That's all you've proven, here. Hitler hated true Christians & lied about them, just like you & people of your ilk have been doing for a while.

The one world religion is going to be despised by people all over the world. Your Aryan cult/religion is promoted by all of the occultists in government, and hated by true followers of common laws & true prophets.

Hitler's Racial Ideology: Content and Occult Sources

Hitler believed that the Aryan race, to which all "true" Germans belonged, was the race whose blood (soul) was of the highest degree. God Himself had, in fact, created the Aryans as the most perfect men, both physically and spiritually


Occult Roots of Nazism: Secret Aryan Cults and Their Influence...

People, who are involved in man-made religious groups (including the so-called "spiritual organizations", who can't hide the fact that they're religious, as well) have never quit lying about life in general. Baal-god is a false-idol, and your so-called, "spiritual religion" is man-made. There's absolutely no proof to support your claims that it isn't a man-made religion.

Pagans have a long history of sacrificing humans. True Christians, and other real Abrahamic-religious groups do not sacrifice humans. "Jesus" is a false-idol invented by heathens, who have a long history of making false-idols. So have a "happy Sun-day", pagans/heathens (liars, who may or may not pose as non-denominational "conservative Christians" or "spiritual").

Dark Secrets inside Bohemian Grove: Special Feature

Google Video Link


In this special bonus video feature, Alex discusses the reaction to his July 2000 infiltration of Bohemian Grove and how the media tried to discredit Alex's presentation of the evidence. Also, the delusion of liberal hippy socialists who 'protested' the grove by having their own pagan ritual is exposed.


[edit on 26-4-2009 by News And History]



posted on Apr, 26 2009 @ 04:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Indigo_Child
 



The Aryans had thousands of Mantras, and new Mantras can be invented as well. However, there is no language other than Sanskrit in which Mantras can be created. Sanskrit was especially constructed to create Mantras. It is advanced spiritual and scientific language which works with sound directly. No other language has the powers Sanskrit does and this is why in most esoteric schools Sanskrit is still the language of choice for Mantras.


I remember reading months back about Sanskrit writing being 'drawn' as the sounds (phonetically) appear on an osscilator. There was a video floating around youtube back then, I'll go and have a root for it, but it always fascinated me, it shows a clear knowledge of cymatics, a branch of science that we should pay more attention too. Have you come across this at any point during your research? This should be a good argument for the 'advanced' civilization theory, although the argument of how 'advanced' will still go on.

EMM

Edit to add:


People, who are involved in man-made religious groups (including the so-called "spiritual organizations", who can't hide the fact that they're religious, as well) have never quit lying about life in general. Baal-god is a false-idol, and your so-called, "spiritual religion" is man-made. There's absolutely no proof to support your claims that it isn't a man-made religion.


Please tell me you're an atheist otherwise this is monumental hypocracy. I'm getting the impression your Christian, correct me if I'm wrong.

I'd like to add, I follow what I call a 'Personal belief system', it is thrown together from bits and pieces I have found all over, ranging from physics, cosmology, psychology, even bits and pieces of current religions, namely Buddhism and Taoism.

One of the most interesting parts of all this (To me at least
) is how many correlations I find, all over the place, sometimes from just random places (I discovered I share a strange belief of Mormons! I know, weird!).

The same way (IMO) that the nature of most religions, including Christanity and Catholicism has been hijacked for someone's own reasons, so has the Aryan 'belief system' (if that is an accurate approximation). The point is, it doesn't invalidate the previous teachings, it just tries to pretend they never existed.

Do you really think an omnipotent, benevolent, all-loving God, who considers us his children would really penalize people for their beliefs? Or their sexual preferences? That, IMO, is flawed logic, because he then wouldn't be benevolent, OR all-loving.

The 'Ideal' is perfect, the translation and practice is flawed beyond belief.

Edit to add information on Cymatics.


In 1967, the late Hans Jenny, a Swiss doctor, artist, and researcher, published the bilingual book Kymatik -Wellen und Schwingungen mit ihrer Struktur und Dynamik/ Cymatics - The Structure and Dynamics of internal linkWaves and Vibrations. In this book Jenny, like internal linkChladni two hundred years earlier, showed what happens when one takes various materials like sand, spores, iron filings, internal linkwater, and viscous substances, and places them on vibrating metal plates and membranes. What then appears are shapes and motion- patterns which vary from the nearly perfectly ordered and stationary to those that are turbulently developing, organic, and constantly in motion.


Jenny made use of crystal internal linkoscillators and an invention of his own by the name of the tonoscope to set these plates and membranes vibrating. This was a major step forward. The advantage with crystal oscillators is that one can determine exactly which internal linkfrequency and amplitude/volume one wants. It was now possible to research and follow a continuous train of events in which one had the possibility of changing the frequency or the amplitude or both. The tonoscope was constructed to make the human voice visible without any electronic apparatus as an intermediate link. This yielded the amazing possibility of being able to see the physical image of the vowel, tone or song a human being produced directly. Not only could you hear a melody - you could see it, too.

Jenny called this new area of research cymatics, which comes from the Greek kyma, wave. Cymatics could be translated as: the study of how vibrations, in the broad sense, generate and influence patterns, shapes and moving processes.


Not too sure if this is true about the Sanskrit, I'm still checking.

[edit on 26-4-2009 by ElectroMagnetic Multivers]

[edit on 26-4-2009 by ElectroMagnetic Multivers]



posted on Apr, 26 2009 @ 04:35 PM
link   
reply to post by News And History
 


You took the words right from my mouth. ALL of these religions are ALL man made. Its all hearsay. They are all put together by man who claim to have had some sort of communications with some god or idol. I tend to take a more Deistic view on things. That is Im not going to say there isnt a creator or am I gonna disregard spiritualism but I think it is to be found through science and nature and not from some man made stories.

[edit on 26-4-2009 by mybigunit]



posted on Apr, 26 2009 @ 04:37 PM
link   
reply to post by mybigunit
 


The connection of man with "god" is exclusively through personality, not through any kind of institution, society, religion, cult, state, science, etc...

IMHO



posted on Apr, 26 2009 @ 04:43 PM
link   
?? Noble?

[edit on 26-4-2009 by sinister_scarecrow]



posted on Apr, 26 2009 @ 04:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by DangerDeath
reply to post by mybigunit
 


The connection of man with "god" is exclusively through personality, not through any kind of institution, society, religion, cult, state, science, etc...

IMHO


But many people buy into these institutions and sadly they run our policies and have for several thousand years. This is why I cant elect someone who wears religion on their sleeve.



posted on Apr, 26 2009 @ 04:45 PM
link   
reply to post by mybigunit
 

I know what you mean. These pagans think they're gods, and that's why they want us to worship "gods" with them. God(s) (incl. Baal-god & other imaginary lords) don't serve anyone. Heathens, need to throw away their false-idols, and stop playing with the dead or "familiar spirits".

PirateNews.org - Skull & Bones (Order of Death) and Bohemian Grove

Alex Jones, Alexandra Robbins: Skull and Bones at Bohemian Grove

Google Video Link


[...] Undercover video by Alex Jones at Infowars Radio and Mike Hansen, author of Bohemian Grove: Cult Of Conspiracy.

Undercover video from Yale's Skull & Bones ritual human sacrifice. Luciferian quotes from General Albert Pike [...] pope of Freemasonry.

Radio interviews of Alexandra Robbins, John Kerry, George Bush and Tricky dick Nixon, by Democracy Now, BBC. [...]

Part of September911Surprise.com, the shockumentary miniseries awarded twice by Hollywood.

As broadcast on cable access TV by PirateNews.org. [...]

Dark Secrets Inside Bohemian Grove www.archive...org/details/DSIBG

Moloch[:] an ancient Phoenician and Ammonite god, to whom children were sacrificed by burning. -Webster's New World Dictionary "And the LORD spake unto Moses, Whosoever he be of the children of Israel, that giveth any of his seed unto Molech; he shall surely be put to death. And I will set my face against that man, and will cut him off from among his people; because he hath given of his seed unto Molech." -Leviticus 20:1-5

"And Solomon did evil in the sight of the LORD, as did David his father. Then did Solomon build an high place for Chemosh, the abomination of Moab, in the hill that is before Jerusalem, and for Molech, the abomination of the children of Ammon."
-1 Kings 11:6-7

"Because of all the evil of the children of Israel, they, their kings, their princes, their priests, and their prophets, and the inhabitants of Jerusalem. They built the high places of Baal, to cause their sons and their daughters to pass through the fire unto Molech." -Jeremiah 32:32-35 [...]

The upper class in San Francisco is that way. The Bohemian Grove, which I attend from time to time - it is the most faggy goddamn thing that you would ever imagine with that San Francisco crowd. I can't shake hands with anybody from San Francisco." -President Tricky Dick Nixon, White House audiotape, Nixon Presidential Library, 1971 prisonplanet...com/032604nixontape.htm


Nixon Tape Discusses Homosexuals at Bohemian Grove


Nixon mentions witnessing homosexual activity while attending bohemian grove.


[edit on 26-4-2009 by News And History]



posted on Apr, 26 2009 @ 04:47 PM
link   
reply to post by DangerDeath
 


I assume you are Buddhist


Let me present you a scenorio more down to earth.

You are a married police officer, with family and kids, a very good police officer and famous amongst the people for your great skill, valour and virtue. It is because of you society can sleep safe at night knowing that you keep the criminals at bay.

One day you face the biggest dilemma in your career. You catch your own kid commiting a grave crime against a citizen you are sworn to protect. What do you do? Do you do your duty just as you did it before, or do you make an exception for your kid exercising your moral right as a parent to protect your kid? How does a Buddhist answer this dilemma.

Arjuna had to face exactly the same dilemma. His duty, a duty he accepted himself when he was young, was to protect the people and uphold social justice and righteousness. He has killed before as well to uphold that duty. Should he suddenly make an exception now just because his opponents are his kin?

In my opinion if he did make that exception it would have been dishonest, inconsistent and cowardice. So Krishna was right to tell him to do his duty and fight. In the end, Arjuna made his own decision on the weight of Krishna's arguments. He was not forced by Krishna, instead Krishna simply awakend him to see the bigger picture.

[edit on 26-4-2009 by Indigo_Child]



posted on Apr, 26 2009 @ 04:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by mybigunit

Originally posted by DangerDeath
reply to post by mybigunit
 


The connection of man with "god" is exclusively through personality, not through any kind of institution, society, religion, cult, state, science, etc...

IMHO


But many people buy into these institutions and sadly they run our policies and have for several thousand years. This is why I cant elect someone who wears religion on their sleeve.



Civilizations that existed before the bronze age were organized in a more spiritual kind of society and lacked the authority of state.
There weren't so many people at those times and, perhaps because of that, they were all better educated since they didn't have to live through this horrible idea of "working for living", which became a dominant idea as the first authorities instilled monopoly on all food and other necessary things. Since then, it was preferable to have uneducated labor, unable to effectively oppose tyranny of institutions (organized and well armed group of gangsters).
I believe that the authorities also instilled monopoly on religious thought and customs and adapted them to the need to create this "ladder" of institutional responsibility and authority, identifying the ruler with the deity. It is easy to do that when dealing with the ignorant.



posted on Apr, 26 2009 @ 04:58 PM
link   
reply to post by ElectroMagnetic Multivers
 

Atheists are religious too. They have their own system of beliefs. A lot of them even believe in "magic" (ie: "evolution"; monkeys, who become humans, & other theories). Of course, miracles are real, and magic is trickery. Your definitions of "atheism" & "hypocrite" are probably amusing to read to others, but I wouldn't bother adopting your beliefs or man-made religions. Stick with the truth & light of the universe. Even Christians "try" to do that, as well as other seekers of truth.

Atheism Religion

Google Video Link


The atheist religion. Randall Niles looks at what Dawkins, Harris, Dennett, and Hitchens have to say - Please visit www.AllAboutWorldview.org [...] to investigate the latest arguments from the New Atheists.

Also, go to www.RandallNiles.com to watch more videos presenting the atheist religion and its latest evangelists!


[edit on 26-4-2009 by News And History]



posted on Apr, 26 2009 @ 05:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by News And History
reply to post by ElectroMagnetic Multivers
 

Atheists are religious too. They have their own system of beliefs. Of course, a hypocrite in denial wouldn't know this. You may go back to sleep. Dream big, mate.

[edit on 26-4-2009 by News And History]


Lol, I agree with you totally about that, althought that is a tad of a generalisation, this would assume that all Atheists are partial to a bit of scientific method and reasoning, which I assure you is not the case. Some of them just don't know.

I would agree with you that science itself is nothing more than a religion.

What where you saying about a hypocrit in denial? You haven't aswered my question, what is your religion? I was merely pointing out your hypocracy, I myself have been hypocrtical many a time, I try to learn from my mistakes though.

EMM

Edit to add: I may have a quote that could serve you well.

Religion needs a God, God does not need a religion.

Edit to add more info on cymatics.

www.bibliotecapleyades.net...

[edit on 26-4-2009 by ElectroMagnetic Multivers]

[edit on 26-4-2009 by ElectroMagnetic Multivers]



posted on Apr, 26 2009 @ 05:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Indigo_Child
reply to post by DangerDeath
 


I assume you are Buddhist


Let me present you a scenorio more down to earth.

You are a married police officer, with family and kids, a very good police officer and famous amongst the people for your great skill, valour and virtue. It is because of you society can sleep safe at night knowing that you keep the criminals at bay.

One day you face the biggest dilemma in your career. You catch your own kid commiting a grave crime against a citizen you are sworn to protect. What do you do? Do you do your duty just as you did it before, or do you make an exception for your kid exercising your moral right as a parent to protect your kid? How does a Buddhist answer this dilemma.

Arjuna had to face exactly the same dilemma. His duty, a duty he accepted himself when he was young, was to protect the people and uphold social justice and righteousness. He has killed before as well yo uphold that duty. Should he suddenly make an exception now just because his opponent are his kin?

In my opinion if he did make that exception it would have been dishonest, inconsistent and cowardice. So Krishna was right to tell him to do his duty and fight. In the end, Arjuna made his own decision on the weight of Krishna's arguments. He was not forced by Krishna, instead Krishna simply awakend him to see the bigger picture.


[edit on 26-4-2009 by Indigo_Child]


I will answer quickly and precisely


This is a false dilemma for a Buddha (not "ordinary" Buddhist). Buddhists (actual Buddhists) do not participate in society. That is a principle. People who call themselves Buddhists, or their confession is Buddhist, do belong to society, but their "destiny" is rather defined by a set of beliefs in karmic process closely related to the idea of reincarnation. They will follow certain advises and precepts, but they cannot compare with devoted followers of Buddha's philosophy (not religion). Still, they are all called Buddhists... This may be a source of confusion.

Buddha's attitude was strictly ethical and it by definition excludes positioning him/her in place of a function in society. Society is based on the principle of division and it is not a holistic entity (like singularity or unity) - a metaphysical existence beyond perception/division.

Nirvana is a metaphysical source (or "place") of all knowledge which is directly opposed to all life, as life is understood as "direct effect of ignorance" ("depending origination": first ignorance ,then from it life, then from it birth, suffering, death, reincarnation.... until karma accomplishes cessation). So Buddhist approach to social problems is simple: out of knowledge of the origins of all suffering, a Buddhist leaves society and resides in the realm of mindfulness and insight - which is a de facto metaphysical realm.

Mindfulness and insight is the only Buddhist action. For instance, Buddhist priests are not to do any actual work, they are "beggars" and fully depend on other people's good will. In practice, it has been regulated differently, through the monastery-donators custom, but that is not really Buddha's invention. It is a static compromise. It has nothing to do with active Buddhists.

Of course, as long as we live, it is not possible to attain an ideal situation, so we have to make certain compromises, for good or sometimes for bad. Ideally, a true Buddhist would sacrifice him or herself, rather than hurt someone.



posted on Apr, 26 2009 @ 05:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Cthulwho
 

That's an interesting reference. The out of India theory may be supported by DNA research though, notably the National Geographic project which is tracing very early dna to the area of Northern India and the Caucasus, specifically around Georgia. It will be interesting indeed to see what results further research produces, I think life started in Asia and not Africa but that is my opinion.



posted on Apr, 26 2009 @ 05:27 PM
link   
reply to post by News And History
 


Thank for your comments. I think one thing you have illustrated with eloquence that the ideology you espouse is exactly as I described it. It is anti-Aryan(unnoble) it promotes persecution of Aryan cultures, whom you call Pagans/heathens. If you are speaking like this in the 21st century in an age of supposed secularism and political correctness, you can only imagine how the Abrahmic religious elite were thinking back 2000 years ago.

The fact is the Abrahmic religion deliberately and actively suppressed our Aryan heritage through spreading propoganda, through division, through perversion of Aryan teachings and through persecution of the Heathen/Pagans/Gnostics.

One thing I never quite understood if the Pagan gods's are false, why is it that it is the Abrahmic religion that is the tyrant that condemns anybody that so much as says a good word about them or challenges Abrahic doctrines, to death?

I said it earlier and I'll say it again. You are looking for the devil outside without realising that the devil has been living inside for a very very long time.

You gain nothing by supporting such a tyrannical religion. You are none the better for being a member of it. You are angry, contemptful and hateful of others. But you have everything to lose: your real spiritual heritage that can help you become a noble person, a content person, a more compassionate and wiser person in THIS life. No false promises of eternal salvation after you die.

The Abrahmic religion was created purely for the purpose of control to keep the god-men of the religion in power. To keep the masses - you - suppressed, so that they never discover their self-worth and self-power.
They are the ones behind all the wars, crusades, inquisitions, exploitation of the poor in the world. Do you really think this is what the genuine god ordains? In that case you worship not god, but the devil.



posted on Apr, 26 2009 @ 05:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by DangerDeath

Originally posted by Indigo_Child
Ideally, a true Buddhist would sacrifice him or herself, rather than hurt someone.



And being a true master, and knower of all the VEDAS and studying under many of its masters, this is where The Buddha, through the very thing that the OP states Meditation, and not EXTERNALISED worship of entities, gods etc as in the Hindu Pantheon he was taught, and learnt and mastered, evolved the truths of the Op's thrust to its final and true understanding of any of the truths in the Hindu scripts.

He integrated Bodhicitta to the practises of Hinduistic meditation and life, internalised all locus of control, therefore also not feeding any external deities and became harmonised, or perceived totally the said such universal mind of God discussed in the Hindu tradition and the Veda's. Realising therefore that this mind of god was also accessable within himself, and to take no notice of the rising and falling of the energies within it outside of his own perception and focus within it.

Buddha put the cherry on the cake, so it was complete and total.

Kind Regards,

Elf

[edit on 26-4-2009 by MischeviousElf]



posted on Apr, 26 2009 @ 05:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Indigo_Child
 


You said :
I want this thread to be an informative and positive one which will re-introduce your Aryan heritage to you ...

I have followed this thread with interest, and with all due respect, would like to take issue with you regarding, IMHO, your 'unfortunate' use of the term 'Aryan.'

Honestly, again IMHO, you would have been much better advised to have substituted the term 'Vedic' for all instances when the term 'Aryan' has occurred in your posts in this thread.

But, I am getting somewhat 'ahead of myself' here.

Here's where I'm coming from - let's look at a few definitions -


connotation
  1. The act or process of connoting.
  2. An idea or meaning suggested by or associated with a word or thing:
      a. Hollywood holds connotations of romance and glittering success.
      b. The set of associations implied by a word in addition to its literal meaning.

  3. Logic. The set of attributes constituting the meaning of a term; intension.
Source : Answers.com

Aryan
  1. Indo-Iranian. No longer in technical use.
  2. A member of the people who spoke the parent language of the Indo-European languages. No longer in technical use.
  3. A member of any people speaking an Indo-European language. No longer in technical use.
  4. In Nazism and neo-Nazism, a non-Jewish Caucasian, especially one of Nordic type, supposed to be part of a master race.
Source : Answers.com

subtext
  1. The implicit meaning or theme of a literary text.
  2. The underlying personality of a dramatic character as implied or indicated by a script or text and interpreted by an actor in performance.
Source : Answers.com


Hence, I am thereby asserting here that your use of the term 'Aryan' is unfortunate as well as unskillful.

As we can see from the above definintion of 'Aryan' provided by a common on-line source, all definitions but the 4th are 'no longer in technical use.'

Only the 4th is still 'alive' in people's minds.

'Unfair' though it may be, the term 'Aryan' is now so 'loaded' with 'subtext' that for all practical intents and purposes it is 'poisoned.'

From the title of this thread, and indeed running throughout your posts here is an 'unspoken subtext' of some kind of 'master race,' or 'group superiority' or 'whatever' ...

I am not claiming with certainty this was at all your intention, but because of the 'poisonous' nature of the term 'Aryan' as detailed above, you have done yourself a 'disservice' by this unfortunate and indeed, once again, 'unskillfull' use of language.

Now, on the other hand, if you were already aware of this demonstrated 'subtext' issue, and used the term 'Aryan' anyway, just to make 'some kind of a point,' then you do more harm than good.

I am calling you out on this, because clearly, you are quite intelligent, and the 'subtext issue' is not one I would have expected you to miss ...

Is it that you just have a 'big chip' on your shoulder ?

What say you ?



posted on Apr, 26 2009 @ 05:39 PM
link   
Basically, but I say this with full awareness that Buddha confirmed his acquired knowledge from others through his own practice and experience - Buddha was very well into the one of the oldest spiritual and ascetic practices of Jainism (the true Giants), which were and still are one of the most formidable practitioners of ahimsa - non-violence. And Buddha was well acquainted with the Yoga philosophical tradition (yoga means yoke, that is "restraint" - meditation and non-action in sense of yielding to affections...).

In my opinion, these spiritual disciplines, which were fully developed in Buddha's time (the time of Heraclitus and other pre-Socratic philosophers, to mention just few) are far older than any civilization in history we are aware of.

In historical times, we can only witness a huge and deadly degradation of this spiritual culture.



posted on Apr, 26 2009 @ 05:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by visible_villain
reply to post by Indigo_Child
 


You said :
I want this thread to be an informative and positive one which will re-introduce your Aryan heritage to you ...

I have followed this thread with interest, and with all due respect, would like to take issue with you regarding, IMHO, your 'unfortunate' use of the term 'Aryan.'

Honestly, again IMHO, you would have been much better advised to have substituted the term 'Vedic' for all instances when the term 'Aryan' has occurred in your posts in this thread.


Oh hell no! That is as good as defeat.

Why allow people to keep associating ONE persons perspective of anything (in this case 'ARYAN') when you can inform them of the true meaning (or at least, it's original meaning), this would help people avoid these things in the future. This has happened the world over, many times and it is the 'way' you are stating that allows it to keep cropping back up, people don't learn!


As we can see from the above definintion of 'Aryan' provided by a common on-line source, all definitions but the 4th are 'no longer in technical use.'

Only the 4th is still 'alive' in people's minds.


Not strictly true, but even if it where, why would you not challenge it!? It is a falsified version of what was originally intended.

'

Unfair' though it may be, the term 'Aryan' is now so 'loaded' with 'subtext' that for all practical intents and purposes it is 'poisoned.'


To throw out a metaphor, you don't ignore poison, you cure it.


From the title of this thread, and indeed running throughout your posts here is an 'unspoken subtext' of some kind of 'master race,' or 'group superiority' or 'whatever' ...


I agree with you here, there is a subtext, but that is my (our) problem, not the OP's. He is doing his best to get people out of this 'rut of subtext' and where as I don't agree with a few of the things he says, aswell as how he says them (IMO, he gives the impression that his is the right way) he shouldn't change the original form to suit the current audience.


What say you ?


EMM









 
112
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join